So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Most of the reason why the price increases so much is because of government. All the government healthcare plans and regulations is what drives the price way up.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Most of the reason why the price increases so much is because of government. All the government healthcare plans and regulations is what drives the price way up.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Most of the reason why the price increases so much is because of government. All the government healthcare plans and regulations is what drives the price way up.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Most of the reason why the price increases so much is because of government. All the government healthcare plans and regulations is what drives the price way up.

OK, lets start with the topic at hand. Prescription drugs - not "healthcare", but we can get to that if you like.

In the US, we pay the highest price for prescription drugs throughout the world. Not by a little, but by a LOT. Of some new cancer drugs, some run as high as 100k/year. many existing drugs have gone UP 3x to 10x per year. Some of this is a race for profit. This is admitted in the drug industry, focus on profits has been on a steady rise since the 80's. Many want to point to high R&D costs. The problem with using that justification is, that is not where the pharmaceutical companies spend there money. They spend the lion share on... marketing! Again, a huge growth since the 80's. Drugs were NOT typically marketed directly to the consumer. Further, the R&D is NOT more expensive than in other industry's. Some drug companies are crazy high, but the average falls in-line with tech and the auto industries. It can cost about the same amount to develop a new model car (say 1.5 billion) as it does to make a new drug (some more).

We, the US make most of the drugs. Our taxes fund the lion share of the "base research". So, why do we pay more? We DONT HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE! Other countries with some form of single-payer, or more centralized system set the price that can be charge. The drug co can charge whatever they like in the US, and with a lust of absurd profits, they charge what the market can bare. In the case of life and death, that is a hole lot of cash.

OK, lets start with the topic at hand. Prescription drugs - not "healthcare", but we can get to that if you like.

In the US, we pay the highest price for prescription drugs throughout the world. Not by a little, but by a LOT. Of some new cancer drugs, some run as high as 100k/year. many existing drugs have gone UP 3x to 10x per year. Some of this is a race for profit. This is admitted in the drug industry, focus on profits has been on a steady rise since the 80's. Many want to point to high R&D costs. The problem with using that justification is, that is not where the pharmaceutical companies spend there money. They spend the lion share on... marketing! Again, a huge growth since the 80's. Drugs were NOT typically marketed directly to the consumer. Further, the R&D is NOT more expensive than in other industry's. Some drug companies are crazy high, but the average falls in-line with tech and the auto industries. It can cost about the same amount to develop a new model car (say 1.5 billion) as it does to make a new drug (some more).

We, the US make most of the drugs. Our taxes fund the lion share of the "base research". So, why do we pay more? We DONT HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE! Other countries with some form of single-payer, or more centralized system set the price that can be charge. The drug co can charge whatever they like in the US, and with a lust of absurd profits, they charge what the market can bare. In the case of life and death, that is a hole lot of cash.

Before I continue my argument let me get this clear. Your point is the companies focusing more profit on profit is the cause for the increase.

In the current system, they are allowed to pursue any amount of profit. Right or wrong, a large part of the cause is that we do not restrict this in any way. Other countries where the same drugs are costing less are limiting the prices that can be charged. That is a causal factor, not government interference CAUSING higher prices. Your initial point is the REVERSE of the reality.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Companies should not have exclusive rights to manufacture drugs. A royalty to the r and d pharma corp should be more than sufficient to continue effective drug developments.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

I see two solutions to this problem so far, one the government takes away their exclusive rights to the drug and allows other companies to produce it, leading to more competition and lower prices. The other is that the government steps in and controls the price of the drug to make is cheaper. I truthfully don't know which of these options would be better but I completely agree that this company having a monopoly on a specific, and essential drug is outrageous.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

It's worth noting that, as far as I'm aware, that drug is not protected by patent. A generic version could be available, but isn't, just because it hasn't been worth it to produce, and the new "owners" of the drug have made it harder to do so:

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

The FDA has made the barrier of entry to being a drug company so high it's resulted in this. If the guy had 100 competitors it wouldn't have happened. Blame over regulation

OK, lets start with the topic at hand. Prescription drugs - not "healthcare", but we can get to that if you like.

In the US, we pay the highest price for prescription drugs throughout the world. Not by a little, but by a LOT. Of some new cancer drugs, some run as high as 100k/year. many existing drugs have gone UP 3x to 10x per year. Some of this is a race for profit. This is admitted in the drug industry, focus on profits has been on a steady rise since the 80's. Many want to point to high R&D costs. The problem with using that justification is, that is not where the pharmaceutical companies spend there money. They spend the lion share on... marketing! Again, a huge growth since the 80's. Drugs were NOT typically marketed directly to the consumer. Further, the R&D is NOT more expensive than in other industry's. Some drug companies are crazy high, but the average falls in-line with tech and the auto industries. It can cost about the same amount to develop a new model car (say 1.5 billion) as it does to make a new drug (some more).

We, the US make most of the drugs. Our taxes fund the lion share of the "base research". So, why do we pay more? We DONT HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE! Other countries with some form of single-payer, or more centralized system set the price that can be charge. The drug co can charge whatever they like in the US, and with a lust of absurd profits, they charge what the market can bare. In the case of life and death, that is a hole lot of cash.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

1. Our ban on importing (much cheaper) prescription drugs from outside the US, which was imposed on us by our wonderful corporatist politicians. If American pharmaceutical companies had to deal with that sort of foreign competition, we would surely see prices at home begin to decline.

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

3. We, as a whole, are far unhealthier than people in other countries. More demand for healthcare services = higher prices. Basic economics.

4. Our reliance on private health insurance companies to pay for drugs has artificially inflated our purchasing power. Health insurance enables us to buy exorbitantly-priced products that we would never be able to pay for out-of-pocket, thus signalling to pharmaceutical companies that they can safely keep charging those prices without reducing demand.

Having a universal healthcare system wouldn't solve for a lot of these problems.

OK, lets start with the topic at hand. Prescription drugs - not "healthcare", but we can get to that if you like.

In the US, we pay the highest price for prescription drugs throughout the world. Not by a little, but by a LOT. Of some new cancer drugs, some run as high as 100k/year. many existing drugs have gone UP 3x to 10x per year. Some of this is a race for profit. This is admitted in the drug industry, focus on profits has been on a steady rise since the 80's. Many want to point to high R&D costs. The problem with using that justification is, that is not where the pharmaceutical companies spend there money. They spend the lion share on... marketing! Again, a huge growth since the 80's. Drugs were NOT typically marketed directly to the consumer. Further, the R&D is NOT more expensive than in other industry's. Some drug companies are crazy high, but the average falls in-line with tech and the auto industries. It can cost about the same amount to develop a new model car (say 1.5 billion) as it does to make a new drug (some more).

We, the US make most of the drugs. Our taxes fund the lion share of the "base research". So, why do we pay more? We DONT HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE! Other countries with some form of single-payer, or more centralized system set the price that can be charge. The drug co can charge whatever they like in the US, and with a lust of absurd profits, they charge what the market can bare. In the case of life and death, that is a hole lot of cash.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

1. Our ban on importing (much cheaper) prescription drugs from outside the US, which was imposed on us by our wonderful corporatist politicians. If American pharmaceutical companies had to deal with that sort of foreign competition, we would surely see prices at home begin to decline.

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

3. We, as a whole, are far unhealthier than people in other countries. More demand for healthcare services = higher prices. Basic economics.

4. Our reliance on private health insurance companies to pay for drugs has artificially inflated our purchasing power. Health insurance enables us to buy exorbitantly-priced products that we would never be able to pay for out-of-pocket, thus signalling to pharmaceutical companies that they can safely keep charging those prices without reducing demand.

Having a universal healthcare system wouldn't solve for a lot of these problems.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

1. Our ban on importing (much cheaper) prescription drugs from outside the US, which was imposed on us by our wonderful corporatist politicians. If American pharmaceutical companies had to deal with that sort of foreign competition, we would surely see prices at home begin to decline.

There are two issues here. One) re-importation. Two) FDA restrictions. Our actual drugs come in large part from China and India using the formula of American companies. Generally, the FDA does protect for "quality" in imported drugs, regardless of source. That is a good thing. The re-import issues is all about how screwed-up the subject matter is in the first place. You can buy a drug produced by an American firm, sold to, say France, for a lower cost than we can get it in our own country. That is because of the negotiated price structure gained using things like nationalized healthcare. However, the root of this is, the American companies.

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

This is a myth worth a real discussion. Many "new" drugs can go over 1 billion to make. In that is a lot of costs that are inflated, but here is the point. A new model car can cost more than 1 billion to produce. The tech industry spends as much on R&D as pharma. AND, many drugs are versions of the last drug. They cost 10s of millions, not billions. They are simply improvements over the last version. Add that base research has been covered by the American tax dollar, and the drug co case for "insane R&D" costs looks like crying of one of the most profitable industries.

3. We, as a whole, are far unhealthier than people in other countries. More demand for healthcare services = higher prices. Basic economics.

No. No were aren't.

4. Our reliance on private health insurance companies to pay for drugs has artificially inflated our purchasing power. Health insurance enables us to buy exorbitantly-priced products that we would never be able to pay for out-of-pocket, thus signalling to pharmaceutical companies that they can safely keep charging those prices without reducing demand.

I would like to discuss this too, just don't have the time. Might want to do a debate on the subject.

Having a universal healthcare system wouldn't solve for a lot of these problems.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

1. Our ban on importing (much cheaper) prescription drugs from outside the US, which was imposed on us by our wonderful corporatist politicians. If American pharmaceutical companies had to deal with that sort of foreign competition, we would surely see prices at home begin to decline.

There are two issues here. One) re-importation. Two) FDA restrictions. Our actual drugs come in large part from China and India using the formula of American companies. Generally, the FDA does protect for "quality" in imported drugs, regardless of source. That is a good thing. The re-import issues is all about how screwed-up the subject matter is in the first place. You can buy a drug produced by an American firm, sold to, say France, for a lower cost than we can get it in our own country. That is because of the negotiated price structure gained using things like nationalized healthcare. However, the root of this is, the American companies.

I'm not sure how that disagrees with anything I said.

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

This is a myth worth a real discussion. Many "new" drugs can go over 1 billion to make. In that is a lot of costs that are inflated, but here is the point. A new model car can cost more than 1 billion to produce. The tech industry spends as much on R&D as pharma.

http://www.nsf.gov...Scroll down to the section on R&D intensity (i.e. R&D expenditures as a percentage of sales). The pharmaceutical industry trumps the technology industry by nearly 2x, and the vehicle industry by almost 3.

AND, many drugs are versions of the last drug. They cost 10s of millions, not billions. They are simply improvements over the last version.

That goes for literally every industry. The 2004 Honda Odyssey is not a vast improvement on the 2003 Honda Odyssey, nor is the iPhone 6 Plus relative to the iPhone 6. Improvements still cost money, though -- the R&D intensity stat includes both innovations as well as completely new products.

Add that base research has been covered by the American tax dollar,

pharma.about.com/od/Research-and-Development/a/Who-Funds-Biomedical-Research.htmThe vast majority of biomedical research is funded by the private sector (65%). Not that it matters, though. The R&D intensity number is true regardless.

and the drug co case for "insane R&D" costs looks like crying of one of the most profitable industries.

No, there's a legitimate basis for the claim that R&D costs force pharmaceutical products to be expensive. That's not to say that prices can't be reduced, but companies do rely on being able to charge higher prices in the US in order to remain profitable (hence why they spend so much money on marketing and lobbying here).

3. We, as a whole, are far unhealthier than people in other countries. More demand for healthcare services = higher prices. Basic economics.

No. No were aren't.

Yes, yes we are...

4. Our reliance on private health insurance companies to pay for drugs has artificially inflated our purchasing power. Health insurance enables us to buy exorbitantly-priced products that we would never be able to pay for out-of-pocket, thus signalling to pharmaceutical companies that they can safely keep charging those prices without reducing demand.

I would like to discuss this too, just don't have the time. Might want to do a debate on the subject.

I'd like to debate you on UHC in general.

Having a universal healthcare system wouldn't solve for a lot of these problems.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

1. Our ban on importing (much cheaper) prescription drugs from outside the US, which was imposed on us by our wonderful corporatist politicians. If American pharmaceutical companies had to deal with that sort of foreign competition, we would surely see prices at home begin to decline.

There are two issues here. One) re-importation. Two) FDA restrictions. Our actual drugs come in large part from China and India using the formula of American companies. Generally, the FDA does protect for "quality" in imported drugs, regardless of source. That is a good thing. The re-import issues is all about how screwed-up the subject matter is in the first place. You can buy a drug produced by an American firm, sold to, say France, for a lower cost than we can get it in our own country. That is because of the negotiated price structure gained using things like nationalized healthcare. However, the root of this is, the American companies.

I'm not sure how that disagrees with anything I said.

Said I agreed with point 1

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

This is a myth worth a real discussion. Many "new" drugs can go over 1 billion to make. In that is a lot of costs that are inflated, but here is the point. A new model car can cost more than 1 billion to produce. The tech industry spends as much on R&D as pharma.

http://www.nsf.gov...Scroll down to the section on R&D intensity (i.e. R&D expenditures as a percentage of sales). The pharmaceutical industry trumps the technology industry by nearly 2x, and the vehicle industry by almost 3.

Link the chart you would like to discuss.

AND, many drugs are versions of the last drug. They cost 10s of millions, not billions. They are simply improvements over the last version.

That goes for literally every industry. The 2004 Honda Odyssey is not a vast improvement on the 2003 Honda Odyssey, nor is the iPhone 6 Plus relative to the iPhone 6. Improvements still cost money, though -- the R&D intensity stat includes both innovations as well as completely new products.

Agreed. The myth is that each drug costs 1b+. That is simply not true.

The lack of price ceilings in the American healthcare system is only one factor among many which contributes to our much higher healthcare costs. There are several other causes, including:

2. The pharmaceutical industry is just an inherently high-risk industry, and as a result will inevitably have high prices. It costs more than a billion dollars to develop the average new drug, most new drugs don't ever make it to the shelves, and of those that do, many do not succeed market-wise. Companies kinda need to set high prices in order to turn a profit. There's a reason why pharmaceutical companies focus on marketing in the US so much more than they do in other countries -- they rely on Americans buying their drugs at higher prices to remain profitable.

This is a myth worth a real discussion. Many "new" drugs can go over 1 billion to make. In that is a lot of costs that are inflated, but here is the point. A new model car can cost more than 1 billion to produce. The tech industry spends as much on R&D as pharma.

http://www.nsf.gov...Scroll down to the section on R&D intensity (i.e. R&D expenditures as a percentage of sales). The pharmaceutical industry trumps the technology industry by nearly 2x, and the vehicle industry by almost 3.

AND, many drugs are versions of the last drug. They cost 10s of millions, not billions. They are simply improvements over the last version.

That goes for literally every industry. The 2004 Honda Odyssey is not a vast improvement on the 2003 Honda Odyssey, nor is the iPhone 6 Plus relative to the iPhone 6. Improvements still cost money, though -- the R&D intensity stat includes both innovations as well as completely new products.

Agreed. The myth is that each drug costs 1b+. That is simply not true.

That's not the point, though. The "1 billion" number on its own is worthless. Examining relative R&D intensity provides far more information, and the pharmaceutical industry trumps everyone in that respect.

This ignores the fact that the company is working on free-of-charge options for patients that can't afford the medicine, and that the increase in cost is so that the company can fund for research making the drug even better...

Also, the company did not buy the patent, but the company. If it were overpriced, a generic could easily come forth and undercut the current pricing... Plus, the company has decided to lower the price because of the public backlash, which is another way the market works to reduce costs.

I don't think a 100% free market is good for the health care industry, but letting market forces work is a step in the right direction. This whole price hike thing has been overblown and totally misrepresented by the media, and it ignores the fact that the market is lowering the prices because of our backlash. The price hike is a short-term profit motive to increase innovation and make the drug better--it is possibly a carcinogenic with terrible side effects--and would go down once competitors enter the market (or people, like they are now, get sick of it). This is a really bad example.

The point is, R&D is VERY expensive for the Tech and auto industry. As much, or more than in pharma.

No, that's not the same thing at all...What your graph(s) show is the percentage of R&D spending for each industry compared to total R&D spending for all industries. That doesn't prove anything. Like I said, the sheer numerical quantity of R&D spending is insignificant -- what matters is R&D intensity, which actually measures how how much a company's profitability is affected by its R&D costs.

Let's say we have two companies:Company A spends $10 on R&D and earns $50 in sales.Company B spends $5 on R&D and earns $20 in sales.

Company A might technically spend more, but R&D spending is clearly more of a burden on Company B's profitability. Your evidence ignores that and just focuses on the difference between $10 and $5, which is pretty much irrelevant.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

This is a really tough issue. Private companies do a much better job of creating new drugs, but there are huge risks with that. Remind me at some point, and I'll write a really substantive post on this.

Intellectual property rights shouldn't apply to medicine, and government should reward innovation in medicine itself rather than letting corporations the rights to any advancements made. And I mean, sure, that'd probably be super complicated, but it's always going to be infinitely less ridiculous than what's detailed in the OP.

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Yes, because people are entitled to things that others produce. They have moral blank cheques to cash in for their own benefit, no matter who has to pay.

: At 10/2/2017 3:00:43 AM, YYW wrote:
: Bossy: You are Regina.

:Inferno wrote:
:You sound rather gay.

-- And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

"I believe that my powers of mind are surely such that I would have become in a
certain sense a resolver of all problems. I do not believe that I could have remained in
error anywhere for long. I believe that I would have earned the name of Redeemer,
because I had the nature of a Redeemer. "

So a drug that costs $1 to produce has had its price changed from $13.50 to $750 after a new company acquired the rights to it. That, to me, is disgusting. For a drug that keeps people alive to get a 5000% price increase overnight is extreme and should not be something that takes place in a moral society. What happens to people when instead of having a society where their contributions result in their well-being, we let insurance and pharmaceutical companies run amok?

I might not be as coherent as I'd like to be, but goddamn this pissed me off...

Yes, because people are entitled to things that others produce. They have moral blank cheques to cash in for their own benefit, no matter who has to pay.

We can play the morals game, if you like, sure. But, even more basic, is society. Those laws which allow corporations to charge whatever they want on their patented ideas are maintained by society - by the government apparatus. The question then becomes: why should this be allowed?